President Kennedy Message on Athletics

[homer]

13 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

How, exactly, does one be "excessively compliant" with the law?  I guess the only alternatives are minimally compliant (i.e., at-risk) and non-compliant.

Personally, I think I am 'excessively compliant' with the criminal statutes declaring homicide a first-degree felony...but I have no desire to become less so.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but the real issue here is how can one be pro-UND without being pro-sexism.  You're basically telling girls and young women who happen to like sports that they are spoiled and have too many opportunities.  Toss in the fact that the overwhelming sentiment expressed here is that of predominantly male fans of the revenue sports at UND, and I guarantee that the school's rank-and-file female student athletes will take exception.  The financial house needs to be in order, yes, but the Title IX lightning rod is a dangerous one and should only be part of the analysis.

I'm not telling those girls anything, the 10,000 empty seats when tickets are free speak loud enough.  Not only are "males" on this message board talking but the public is as well.  

No one had a hard time showing up for the "girls" volleyball game last night. 

[Siouxphan27]

7 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

How, exactly, does one be "excessively compliant" with the law?  I guess the only alternatives are minimally compliant (i.e., at-risk) and non-compliant.

Personally, I think I am 'excessively compliant' with the criminal statutes declaring homicide a first-degree felony...but I have no desire to become less so.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but the real issue here is how can one be pro-UND without being pro-sexism.  You're basically telling girls and young women who happen to like sports that they are spoiled and have too many opportunities.  Toss in the fact that the overwhelming sentiment expressed here is that of predominantly male fans of the revenue sports at UND, and I guarantee that the school's rank-and-file female student athletes will take exception.  The financial house needs to be in order, yes, but the Title IX lightning rod is a dangerous one and should only be part of the analysis.

The only pro sexism here would be the ridiculous attempt to justify women's hockey.   

[UNDBIZ]

20 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

How, exactly, does one be "excessively compliant" with the law?  I guess the only alternatives are minimally compliant (i.e., at-risk) and non-compliant.

Personally, I think I am 'excessively compliant' with the criminal statutes declaring homicide a first-degree felony...but I have no desire to become less so.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but the real issue here is how can one be pro-UND without being pro-sexism.  You're basically telling girls and young women who happen to like sports that they are spoiled and have too many opportunities.  Toss in the fact that the overwhelming sentiment expressed here is that of predominantly male fans of the revenue sports at UND, and I guarantee that the school's rank-and-file female student athletes will take exception.  The financial house needs to be in order, yes, but the Title IX lightning rod is a dangerous one and should only be part of the analysis.

I agree that Title IX should only be part of the process. Instead, everytime cuts are being considered a few in power start screaming TITLE IX whenever a cut to a women's sport is brought up as a potential option.

Ah yes and here come the sexism complaints. After dumping M&W S&D and WIH, we'll still have 9 women's sports and 7 men's. Not all of the funding from those cut sports will be completely cut either. Some will be redistributed to other sports (likely more towards women's sports than men's) so our teams, yes even the women's teams, can be more competitive. 

[geaux_sioux]

32 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

How, exactly, does one be "excessively compliant" with the law?  I guess the only alternatives are minimally compliant (i.e., at-risk) and non-compliant.

Personally, I think I am 'excessively compliant' with the criminal statutes declaring homicide a first-degree felony...but I have no desire to become less so.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but the real issue here is how can one be pro-UND without being pro-sexism.  You're basically telling girls and young women who happen to like sports that they are spoiled and have too many opportunities.  Toss in the fact that the overwhelming sentiment expressed here is that of predominantly male fans of the revenue sports at UND, and I guarantee that the school's rank-and-file female student athletes will take exception.  The financial house needs to be in order, yes, but the Title IX lightning rod is a dangerous one and should only be part of the analysis.

These women have the opportunity to get steamrolled by programs that have better funding in most sports at UND. Sounds like a great opportunity. Or they could cut women's hockey which offers almost zero opportunity no matter how good you are and move those dollars to sports that actually do provide an opportunity. And what would you tell the baseball team? How was their opportunity to suck any different than the "girls".

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

1 hour ago, homer said:

I'm not telling those girls anything, the 10,000 empty seats when tickets are free speak loud enough.  Not only are "males" on this message board talking but the public is as well.  

No one had a hard time showing up for the "girls" volleyball game last night. 

Neither of the A's in NCAA stands for attendance.  I would like to hear from student athletes who came up through non-revenue, non-spectator-other-than-parents-and-friends sports to see if any of the NCAA's stated ideals have merit.  Either college sports are a good philosophical idea AT THEIR CORE--and thus deserving of funding and investment--or they aren't.  An empty arena is irrelevant IF the student athletes are being fulfilled through education, character, integrity, personal growth, development, etc.  A lot of views expressed on this subject focus more on the entertainment value to the individual, and not on the bigger picture. 

[Oxbow6]

16 hours ago, Goon said:

Wait, what? 

One of NDSU's all time finest.......Bob Entzion.

[Bison Dan]

3 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

One of NDSU's all time finest.......Bob Entzion.

where did he come from?

[homer]

30 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Neither of the A's in NCAA stands for attendance.  I would like to hear from student athletes who came up through non-revenue, non-spectator-other-than-parents-and-friends sports to see if any of the NCAA's stated ideals have merit.  Either college sports are a good philosophical idea AT THEIR CORE--and thus deserving of funding and investment--or they aren't.  An empty arena is irrelevant IF the student athletes are being fulfilled through education, character, integrity, personal growth, development, etc.  A lot of views expressed on this subject focus more on the entertainment value to the individual, and not on the bigger picture. 

They could get those same experiences as a club sport or another university.  It's getting to the point where math and logic has to also be applied to varsity sport sponsorship.  

[geaux_sioux]

37 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Neither of the A's in NCAA stands for attendance.  I would like to hear from student athletes who came up through non-revenue, non-spectator-other-than-parents-and-friends sports to see if any of the NCAA's stated ideals have merit.  Either college sports are a good philosophical idea AT THEIR CORE--and thus deserving of funding and investment--or they aren't.  An empty arena is irrelevant IF the student athletes are being fulfilled through education, character, integrity, personal growth, development, etc.  A lot of views expressed on this subject focus more on the entertainment value to the individual, and not on the bigger picture. 

NCAA ideals? Really?

[Csonked Out]

35 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Neither of the A's in NCAA stands for attendance.  I would like to hear from student athletes who came up through non-revenue, non-spectator-other-than-parents-and-friends sports to see if any of the NCAA's stated ideals have merit.  Either college sports are a good philosophical idea AT THEIR CORE--and thus deserving of funding and investment--or they aren't.  An empty arena is irrelevant IF the student athletes are being fulfilled through education, character, integrity, personal growth, development, etc.  A lot of views expressed on this subject focus more on the entertainment value to the individual, and not on the bigger picture. 

Like it or not, $$$ does matter and empty arenas don't provide any revenue. It sounds good on paper but it does not apply to Division 1 athletics. Especially for an institution that is looking into it's athletic finances, if you don't provide revenue you go away. That is the reality we are in right now.

 

If you want that sentence to apply then you need to go to a privately funded D3 school.

[geaux_sioux]

47 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Neither of the A's in NCAA stands for attendance.  I would like to hear from student athletes who came up through non-revenue, non-spectator-other-than-parents-and-friends sports to see if any of the NCAA's stated ideals have merit.  Either college sports are a good philosophical idea AT THEIR CORE--and thus deserving of funding and investment--or they aren't.  An empty arena is irrelevant IF the student athletes are being fulfilled through education, character, integrity, personal growth, development, etc.  A lot of views expressed on this subject focus more on the entertainment value to the individual, and not on the bigger picture. 

Playing in front of a tiny crowd sucks. One of the best parts of the experience is when the fans show their appreciation for all of the hard work you put in by comin to your games and cheering loud.

[bincitysioux]

Viverito was just on WDAY and said they have no discussions at this point about expansion.  Nothing new to report......

[82SiouxGuy]

The biggest money losing sport at UND and at most schools is football. UND lost more than $2.5 million on football in the last reported year. If you are making decisions based on losing money you eliminate football like Omaha did.

[homer]

21 minutes ago, 82SiouxGuy said:

The biggest money losing sport at UND and at most schools is football. UND lost more than $2.5 million on football in the last reported year. If you are making decisions based on losing money you eliminate football like Omaha did.

Football is also the sport most schools invest the most heavily in due to interest in the sport and exposure for the university.  Everyone knows why UNO dropped it after moving D1.  It's about 50 miles southwest of Omaha.  

[UND1983]

22 minutes ago, 82SiouxGuy said:

The biggest money losing sport at UND and at most schools is football. UND lost more than $2.5 million on football in the last reported year. If you are making decisions based on losing money you eliminate football like Omaha did.

If that was the only factor used then, yep.  If not then it was a waste of our time.  

[UNDvince97-01]

50 minutes ago, 82SiouxGuy said:

The biggest money losing sport at UND and at most schools is football. UND lost more than $2.5 million on football in the last reported year. If you are making decisions based on losing money you eliminate football like Omaha did.

Revenues, season ticket sales, fan interest, endowments, annual fundraising, ROI after graduation in terms of giving etc.  Strength in numbers.

What's the potential for UND Football?  What's the return? Will it get better?  Time will tell.

What's the potential for UND womens hockey?  What's the return? Will it get better?  Don't we already know that answer?

[Goon]

On 8/26/2016 at 6:20 PM, Shawn-O said:

Up in the press box? 

Yeah, I had a nice chat with him last year. 

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

2 hours ago, homer said:

They could get those same experiences as a club sport or another university. 

Wow. Think about that for a second. And then remember why we're all here.

Pulling the welcome mat from future generations and showing current participants the door are not exactly what #myUND is all about. Which is precisely why killing programs should not be taken lightly or dismissed with a cavalier attitude. A student athlete who pours their heart, soul, blood, sweat, and tears into the University of North Dakota deserves so much more, especially when nobody shows up to watch. Who are any of us to place a value on their experience? 

[UND1983]

18 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Wow. Think about that for a second. And then remember why we're all here.

Pulling the welcome mat from future generations and showing current participants the door are not exactly what #myUND is all about. Which is precisely why killing programs should not be taken lightly or dismissed with a cavalier attitude. A student athlete who pours their heart, soul, blood, sweat, and tears into the University of North Dakota deserves so much more, especially when nobody shows up to watch. Who are any of us to place a value on their experience? 

Never heard that passionate speech last spring from many people, if anybody.  

Is the athletic department supposed to keep running a D2, regional model, losing millions, just so 75+ students can get their "experience"?

[homer]

18 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Wow. Think about that for a second. And then remember why we're all here.

Pulling the welcome mat from future generations and showing current participants the door are not exactly what #myUND is all about. Which is precisely why killing programs should not be taken lightly or dismissed with a cavalier attitude. A student athlete who pours their heart, soul, blood, sweat, and tears into the University of North Dakota deserves so much more, especially when nobody shows up to watch. Who are any of us to place a value on their experience? 

I understand the effort they put in.  I also see that the athletic dept is losing money, state funding is going backwards and free tickets aren't bringing fans to women's hockey games.  

I'll give you something to think about for a second, even having two local Olympic athletes on the team couldn't drive interest in the sport. 

[dakotadan]

5 hours ago, homer said:

I'm not telling those girls anything, the 10,000 empty seats when tickets are free speak loud enough.  

Why is women's hockey expected to draw 11,000+? The football team doesn't even draw that. The basketball teams draw virtually the same size crowds as women's hockey. 

[UND1983]

1 minute ago, dakotadan said:

Why is women's hockey expected to draw 11,000+? The football team doesn't even draw that. The basketball teams draw virtually the same size crowds as women's hockey. 

Are you serious?   Take a lap.

[homer]

3 minutes ago, dakotadan said:

Why is women's hockey expected to draw 11,000+? The football team doesn't even draw that. 

Tickets are free And there is 10000+ empty seats.   I don't expect them to draw 11000 but if interest is there for the sport I expect more.   

[Sioux>Bison]

Men's football and women's hockey is no comparison. One has fans and one does not. One has huge national exposure potential and one does not. Football will never go from UND. Women's hockey is a huge waste of money and should be cut because colleges should start focusing on their main mission, educate students. I could care less if UND had less student athletes because in the end it doesn't affect the education of students.

[Oxbow6]

To defend women's hockey they do bring the valuable "diversity" aspect to the university as 11 of the 25 rostered players are from another country. This makes Sandra Mitchell proud.

 

Subsequently there are 8 non-Americans on the men's roster.....and 5 of them are "27 year old Canadians".